Fitting Probability Distributions to Animal Movement Trajectories: Using Artificial Neural Networks to Link Distance, Resources, and Memory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animal movement paths are often thought of as a confluence of behavioral processes and landscape patterns. Yet it has proven difficult to develop frameworks for analyzing animal movement that can test these interactions. Here we describe a novel method for fitting movement models to data that can incorporate diverse aspects of landscapes and behavior. Using data from five elk (Cervus canadensis) reintroduced to central Ontario, we employed artificial neural networks to estimate movement probability kernels as functions of three landscape-behavioral processes. These consisted of measures of the animals' response to the physical spatial structure of the landscape, the spatial variability in resources, and memory of previously visited locations. The results support the view that animal movement results from interactions among elements of landscape structure and behavior, motivating context-dependent movement probabilities, rather than from successive realizations of static distributions, as some traditional models of movement and resource selection assume. Flexible, nonlinear models may thus prove useful in understanding the mechanisms controlling animal movement patterns.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it